If you want a favor you're more likely to get it if you're connected. This is true in government, business, the press, education, charity, sports, etc.
For example, LeBron James is less likely to have a foul called on him than some random D-leaguer playing off the bench.
If I have a friend in the government, I might call him or her up to get a good ticket to the inauguration. For that I might owe them a favor, which they may or may not call in.
If you're a friend of one of the founders of Twitter you might have gotten a gift of as many as a million free followers in the early days before the press was watching. (And by the way some of the recipients were reporters. Is this even remotely ethical?)
If I leak to a reporter, I can ask for help promoting a new product. (Yes, journalists play this game too.)
This is how the world works.
The press reports news about the Clinton Foundation as if this is not how the world works. Get them some smelling salts, bring in the fainting couch, someone in government did a favor for the foundation that the boss started. (Except that didn't actually happen.)
I wonder if any of the press remembers how Dick Cheney went from Secretary of Defense to CEO of a large defense contractor, then became VP, and they started a war that flowed huge amounts of government money to (wait for it) the very same defense contractor. Was this a scandal? Well, no actually they didn't think it was in Journalism World.
On a scale of 1 to 10 the outrage all this amounts to approx 0.00000001 compared to all the shit that's piled up about the other candidate for President, which somehow does not create "trust issues" for him?
PS: Why aren't the Snowden revelations issues in this campaign? You want a scandal? Seems that's the real outrage. (I'm still voting for Clinton, btw.)